- Nov 12, 2004
- 1,665
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
That thing is an engineering marvel.
However, I think the Space Shuttle program should be scrapped, and replaced with something cheaper that does the job better.
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:
IIRC it's 8 gpm
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:
IIRC it's 8 gpm
gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:
according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:
IIRC it's 8 gpm
gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:
according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: Shawn
Wonder what kind of gas mileage that thing gets. :laugh:
IIRC it's 8 gpm
gallons per meter perhaps. :laugh:
according to wiki
"The crawler burns 150 US gallons of diesel oil per mile (350 L/km);"
Hah, I though 8 gallons per mile sounded really optimistic...
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
You guys are talking about two different things.
The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
You guys are talking about two different things.
The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.
Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
You guys are talking about two different things.
The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.
Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.
My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?
They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
You guys are talking about two different things.
The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.
Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.
My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?
They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.
ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
You guys are talking about two different things.
The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.
Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.
My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?
They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.
ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
All I am saying is that the U.S. should be much further along. Just because we are only one of three countries that have a true space program doesn't mean we should slow down...
Originally posted by: Bootprint
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Originally posted by: NickelTitanium
Why is it considered an engineering marvel? The technology was based on 1950-1970 knowledge. If the U.S. continue to sit and point, then we will be even more behind then we already are. We are no longer the leading edge in a lot of fields. Wake up America.
It is an engineering marvel because it WAS the 1960s. And they are still the largest self-powered tracked vehicle on earth according to wiki. It's payload is at least 6.7 million pounds (which was the weight of the Saturn V)
You guys are talking about two different things.
The crawler isn't a marvel of anything. We could have built that in the 1930's.
Your opinion. But in the 1930s they sure weren't building anything nearly that complex, so you're wrong.
My opinion? Are you retarded? Or just a teenager?
They did build large machines like that back then. There's nothing complex about it, it's just a large machine. Companies commonly make large machines like that.
ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.
Just because it's huge doesn't make it that complex. Look at the company that designed and built it, Marion Power Shovel Company. They didn't create any new technology for it.
Originally posted by: TheDro
God our space shuttles look pretty ghetto now... NASA needs a bigger budget.
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
ok genius, show me a similar machine of similar magnitude and complexity built in the 1930s. This is not like a ship, where you figure the displacement and it just floats. The engineering required to make that thing move empty, let alone with a payload, is impressive.
You simply don't understand, do you? Using the same technology and making it bigger doesn't make something complex.
There was no technical hurdle building the crawler, the technical hurdle is in building the rockets. The reason you don't see more giant machines is because they're very job-specific. Most giant machines are built where they're going to be used, and they stay in the relative area.
It didn't take a bunch of rocket scientists to build this.